Friday, June 14, 2013

Oh Henry! Superman Returns in the Sort of Spectacular “Man of Steel”

Is it even
possible to make a really great Superman movie these days that will be
universally loved? In 2006 Bryan Singer’s romanticized “Superman Returns”
landed in theaters with a collective “meh” and I’m not quite sure anyone’s been
clamoring for more. I enjoyed that film for what it was even though it was full
of flaws (including a terribly bland Lois Lane and a mildly bland Brandon Routh).
Zack Snyder’s “Man of Steel” hoped to correct all that. Now with the massively
successful “Dark Knight” trilogy out of the way, Warner Bros decided to have
another turn at bat with a darker, more brooding take on Superman. Even
Christopher Nolan was brought in to help move things along. The result is sort
of a mix bag: “Man of Steel” has some great sequences and is overall pretty
exciting, but its focus on mind-numbing action and certain narrative choices
stop it from becoming the definitive Superman movie.

A better title
for Man of Steel might as well have been “Superman Begins.” After the success
of the first Spider-man film and Batman Begins, the movie studios chose to
follow the formula of telling various comic superhero characters’ origins. Why
not start at the beginning and start a franchise? “Man of Steel” begins on the
planet Krypton where a massive war is being waged and the planet is in imminent
danger of a full on destruction because of its unstable core. General Zod
(Michael Shannon) is basically being a big jerk and kills Jor-El (Russell
Crowe) but not before he and his wife send their newborn son Kal-El in a space
pod destined for planet Earth. Zod is banished to the Phantom Zone for his
crime and is never to be heard from again, or until the plot requires his
obvious return. It’s cool to see Krypton in all its CGI glory but this prologue
goes on for far too long. We then cut to Kal-El as an adult now played by a
homeless man version of Henry Cavill. We then see too many childhood flashbacks,
which interrupt the flow of the film. His name is Clark Kent and we see him
discovering his various superhuman abilities like x-ray vision and super
strength. He’s raised by an Earthling couple played by Kevin Costner and Diane
Lane. They are both great here. While I actually really liked these flashbacks,
they are awkwardly placed and the film would have benefited from telling a more
straightforward narrative.

Daily Planet
reporter Lois Lane (Amy Adams) is introduced while on assignment somewhere near
the North Pole. It just so happens to be the location where Kal-El can
communicate with the consciousness of his deceased father. Kal-El saves Lois
after being injured and she becomes intent on discovering her rescuer’s identity.
And then eventually it’s revealed that General Zod had been released from the
Phantom Zone after Krypton was destroyed. That’s convenient. He then travels to
Earth and demand that they give up Kal-El or face dire consequences which
include a third act of lots of mind-numbing action.

Most might have
complained that “Superman Returns” didn’t have enough action. Well Man of Steel
just may have too much. Now, the film’s action-packed third act is nowhere near
as atrocious as something Michael Bay might have made, but it still feels like
action and destruction to pad out an already slightly bloated runtime. If there
was even a whiff of actual suspense then it would at least be justified. But
how suspenseful is it to watch two guys who practically can’t be killed fight
each other? Where’s kryptonite when you need it? But in the end the movie is
all worth it because it sets up what could possibly be a better and more
familiar Superman story. Clark finally puts on those thick black framed glasses
and perhaps we’ll finally get to see a ripped Henry Cavill act like a nerdy buffoon.

Am I being too
critical? Yes and no. It is summertime and movies tend to be a lot dumber. It
must be because so many kids are out of school. But at the same time many
people have been waiting patiently for a Superman movie that is just plain
awesome. “Man of Steel” comes close. There are some pretty great visuals here
and for the most part there are some great thrilling moments which are enhanced
by Hans Zimmer’s pounding score. Cavill is a good Superman overall. He’s got
the look and the charm. Thought he doesn’t get to spend enough time as “Clark
Kent” so the jury’s still out on that. I do think this is probably the best the
filmmakers could have done with such an outdated American character, at least
until the sequel. But the film moves along too swiftly foregoing character
development in order to get to the action, but if we don’t know the characters
why should we care whether they live or die? In the end the movie reveals its
biggest surprise: for a more traditional Superman film, “Superman Returns” might
actually be the way to go. GRADE: B-

Followers

About Me

"Hello, Clarice." Welcome to my film review blog. I've been reviewing theatrical movies since 2005. In addition to writing movie reviews (not to mention best of year lists, Oscar predictions, and other fun movie-related lists) I have had reviews and articles published on DarkHorizons.com and at WhatCulture.com. I've also achieved my longtime dream of appearing on RottenTomatoes.com. My favorite film genre is horror though I have rather eclectic cinematic tastes. I can easily go from watching artsy stuff like Under the Skin to stupid action stuff like Transformers (but please dear lord make them stop). I also enjoy running, cooking, and eating the spiciest foods I can find.